As The Stiletto has discussed in numerous posts, Muslims in the Middle East – and Western countries, too - have difficulty comprehending the concepts of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is particularly vexing, therefore, even to Muslims like imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, who claim to be “moderate” but who do not tolerate free speech when the right is used to mock Mohammad or to desecrate the Koran. As for freedom of religion, Muslims consider Christians and Jews infidels, thus the exercise of their religion inevitably involves infringing on the rights of non-Muslims.

This explains why Muslims who insist the First Amendment gives them the right to build a mosque where it is not wanted by the vast majority of Americans and NYers are the very same Muslims who deny the First Amendment rights of people to protest the Ground Zero mosque. The philosophy “my rights end where yours begin” – which has enabled generation after generation of immigrants from disparate cultures to peacefully co-exist in our country - is alien to these people. Only their rights count, not yours. Thus, not building a mega-mosque in the one small area of NYC that Americans consider hallowed ground adds to the seemingly endless list of grievances that Muslims reach for to justify their murderous “outrage.”

But in 2002, when Palestinian gunmen invaded the invaded the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and holed up there for 40 days and – among other desecrations – tore pages from Christian bibles and wiped their asses with them Christians around the world did not riot, shout “Death to Palestinians, Death to Muslims” then grab the first unlucky Muslim man or woman they saw and murder him or her. Christians kept their cool even though not a single Muslim leader – “moderate” or otherwise - condemned the insult. Certainly not Rauf.

In contrast, Afghan Muslims reacted to talk of burning the Koran not with talk of burning the U.S. flag in retaliation, but by actually burning the flag while shouting “Death to Christians.” A typically disproportionate response. And it mattered not that Christian and Jewish leaders issued strong statements condemning the plan to burn Korans or that the stupid stunt was ultimately called off. All. Christians. Must. Die.

Although one could take strong exception to the method that The Rev. Terry Jones, pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center, had chosen to make his point about the First Amendment, he did have a valid criticism to make:

"We think it's time to turn the tables, and instead of possibly blaming us for what could happen, we put the blame where it belongs - on the people who would do it. And maybe instead of addressing us, we should address radical Islam and send a very clear warning that they are not to retaliate in any form."

The State Department called the threatened Koran burning “provocative” and “un-American,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said it was “idiotic and dangerous,” General David Petraeus warned that "the safety of our soldiers and civilians would be put in jeopardy, and accomplishment of the mission would be made more difficult" and President Obama himself condemned the act as “completely contrary to our values as Americans; that this country has been built on the notions of religious freedom and religious tolerance." But not a single one of them acknowledged that our country was also built on the notion of tolerance of free speech and dissent – and the degree to which we can exercise this right is uniquely - and very - American.

But none of them – not even Petraeus – warned Islamofascists not to rabble-rouse and kill innocent Christians in their midst or the U.S. would be forced to take swift and severe action. None of them condemned the 100 death threats received by Jones or Afghan protestors burning his effigy. And no U.S. government official – most notably Obama, who has twice now cited the First Amendment in support of the Ground Zero mosque – come forward to condemn the death threats against Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris (ninth item) that have driven her underground on the advice of the FBI.

Although CAIR spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper lamented to The Washington Times that Jones’ protest will be misinterpreted by Muslims around the world (“Unfortunately, not most of the people in the Muslim world really understand that this is a tiny, fringe group with a church of some 50 people that has been repudiated and rejected by all mainstream religious groups in America”) he acknowledged that Muslims do not fully grasp the First Amendment:

"It will be unfortunate if all the Muslim world sees or hears are images of Korans being burned in America and not understanding the American context of the First Amendment that doesn't allow the government to prevent such a thing."

Apparently, neither does our non-Muslim president, else instead staying silent about threatening violence against American citizens for exercising their free speech rights, he would have used Jones and Norris as a “teachable moment” to explain freedom of speech to the Muslim world and how America balances sometimes competing rights so that everyone lives on equal and reasonably amicable footing.

She’s In!  She’s Out!  She’s In!

By Lemonfemale

Even if every single person who voted for her in the primary writes her name on the ballot, it's going to be an uphill battle, at best. Can she win? 

Three reasons why she could:

† Murkowski lost the Republican primary to Tea Party upstart Joe Miller by just 1,200 votes.

† AK Republican pollster Dave Dittman conducted a poll of "proven voters," (Alaskans who voted in the last general election) earlier in the month that found 37 percent would support Murkowski as a write-in candidate, 32 percent would vote for Miller and 19 percent would back Democratic nominee Scott Adams.

† She has 100 percent name recognition and a $1 million war chest.

But for each plus there is a minus:

† After being appointed by her father, Frank Murkowski, to finish out his term after he became governor in 2002 she was elected to a full term in 2004 - but won less than 50 percent of the vote because of a series of controversial and ethically dubious decisions her father had made, and people weren’t too thrilled about how she got into the Senate in the first place.

In a statistical dead heat with former Gov. Tony Knowles (D) for most of the race, she managed to eke out a three point margin of victory (48.6 percent to 45.6%) by arguing that the Republican majority in the Senate was razor thin (going into the election it was 51 to 49) and Alaskans had to do their part to keep the Senate from flipping. (Tellingly, 56 percent of voters also supported a ballot initiative to strip the governor of the authority to appoint Senators.)

† Strom Thurmond is the only politician who successfully waged a write-in Senate campaign, winning 63.1 percent of the vote in SC in the 1954 election. More relevant, none of the candidates who mounted write-in campaigns for statewide office in AK since 1958 won more than 27 percent of the vote. Ironically, Knowles became governor by beating a write-in candidate, State Senator Robin Taylor (R) 51.3 percent vs. 18.3 percent. And the last person who tried to get elected to the Senate with a write-in candidacy was Ernest Gruening (D) in 1968, who not only lost to Mike Gravel (D) but came in last in a three-man race with just 17.4 percent of the vote.

† The Murkowski name is tarnished (video link). When Frank Murkowski father ran for re-election in 2006, he came in last out of three candidates (Sarah Palin got 50.6 percent of the votes in the Republican primary; John Binkley, 29.8 percent; and Murkowski, 19 percent) and by the time he left office he was the most unpopular governor in the state’s history. And it wasn’t just that $2.7 million jet that Palin famously sold on eBay; people were also ticked off that he appointed his own daughter to the Senate.

† While some establishment Republicans are at odds with some Tea Party candidates, here in AK the state’s Republican Party Chairman Randy Ruedrich issued a statement in which he vowed that Murkowski “will receive no support of any kind from the Alaska Republican Party” and that “[w]e will treat her candidacy as we would anyone who chooses to oppose our party’s nominees.”

Murkowski is to the left of the majority of Alaskans, who went for John McCain over Barack Obama 59.4 percent to 37.9 percent. As Anchorage Daily News political analyst Michael Carey noted in an interview with The Washington Post:

"Joe Miller turned Lisa Murkowski into a Democrat, a Tony Knowles Democrat. This was either brilliant or dumb luck. He just rolled her up in the most conservative areas of the state. Those voters always - always - look for the most conservative candidate, and they sure found him."

Moreover, despite her assertion that the state’s Republican party has been “hijacked” by Outside extremists (video link) – she’s using Jimmy Carter’s talking points! - Murkowski’s record does not suggest that she will be able to swim against this year’s anti-incumbent, anti-Washington tide:

† She favors government-run healthcare (audio link) and opposed the repeal of Obamacare (video link) until her position became a significant political liability.

† Primary voters were also asked to decide whether to pass Ballot Measure 2, which requires parental notification before a minor’s abortion. Miller supported Ballot Measure 2 and Murkowski – alone amongst all Republicans running in statewide races - did not. It passed with 55 percent of the vote, and Bernadette Wilson, campaign manager for Alaskans for Parental Rights – the group behind Ballot Measure 2 – noted that "People who voted 'yes' on Ballot Measure 2 and people who voted for Joe Miller are of like mind. People kind of linked arms and came to the polls for both."

† Primary elections are not closed – unaffiliated voters can participate – meaning that potentially 80 percent of the state’s voters could have cast ballots in the Republican primary. Some of Murkowski’s primary votes came from people who would have voted Democrat in the general election. As The Washington Post reported, on the night she announced her write-in candidacy, Murkowski was “preceded onstage … by Democratic supporters - a potential preview of who she will try to appeal to in the campaign.” 

It remains to be seen how many Democrats write her name on the ballot, but this year more independent voters are self-identifying as conservatives, and they will likely break for Miller in the general election.

Someone I knew whose marriage was on the rocks called a trusted friend to tell her she was sitting in her car watching her estranged husband’s house and asked what she should do. Her friend told her: “Go home. It’s over. You cannot save it.”  Apparently no one has given Murkowski this sound advice. 

The Stiletto Scoops The Washington Times 

[M]any of the “environment sparing” stratagems touted by greens depend on eschewing the labor-saving devices and products that women rely upon to make quick work of onerous household chores like laundry (if you’ve hung sopping wet bath towels on a clothesline, you know how very heavy they are, and unless you live in a very hot, very arid area like Arizona they take the entire day to dry); dishwashing (paper plates, plastic utensils and paper cups may be handy but they add to the mountains of garbage in landfills); and floor-mopping (those Swiffer sheets are wasteful!). So to save the planet, women must quit their jobs and go back to spending several hours a day on chores like beating the dust out of rugs by hand, scrubbing laundry on a washboard and darning socks by candlelight? The Stiletto doesn’t think so.
- "It’s Not Easy Being Green. Just Ask Al Gore.," The Stiletto Blog, August 10, 2006 

If ever there were any doubt that the new environmental movement's primary goal is reversing progress made since the Industrial Revolution, look no further than Europe, where bureaucrats systematically are targeting the conveniences of modern life. To fight the imaginary problem of global warming - sorry, "global climate disruption" - the European Commission has before it a proposal to reduce the electricity used by the humble family vacuum cleaner, the London Telegraph reported. It's only a matter of time before the bureaucracy on our side of the Atlantic sucks up this bad idea. ... Forget modern Hoovers and Dysons; it's time for something out of the 1960 Sears catalog. Congress already has regulated light bulbs, toilets, shower heads and washing machines. It's only a matter of time before it adopts Europe's forthcoming ban on fully functional vacuum cleaners. Forcing the public to return to push brooms and washcloths is not going to save the polar bears.
- "The Left's War On Home Appliances," The Washington Times, September 17, 2010  

The Stiletto Scoops The Wall Street Journal (Again)

[I]t’s not the deficit, the persistently high unemployment rate or the struggling economy that’s stopping Dems from keeping the Bush tax cuts in their current form. It’s that when Obama signs whatever bill Congress sends to his desk, they will no longer be the Bush tax cuts, and after years of demagoguery (“tax cuts for the rich”) Dems can’t negate one of their most oft-repeated attack lines. They’d rather everyone’s taxes go up, than the taxes of wealthy Americans go down.
- “Whether Congress Extends The Bush Tax Cuts Or Not, They’re History,” The Stiletto Blog, July 26, 2010

The political problem Democrats have is self-created. Rather than embrace the winner of full tax relief, President Obama has chosen to draw an ideological line and to motivate his liberal base with his position against tax cuts "for the rich." Democrats are now fearful that if they cave it will demoralize that base, and further handicap them in midterm races.
- “Why Democrats Can't Win on Taxes,” The Wall Street Journal, September 17, 2010